I have inadvertently found myself in a debate on Twitter about the differences of the term 'slavery' in the biblical sense and the way that we think of it today. Does anybody have any proof that this word has changed definitions over the past 2000 years? 

Views: 1072

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Edited to remove my comment.  Sorry, I said I was going to let it drop and then added another line senselessly.

I see nothing wrong or senseless with changing your mind.  Honestly, I think people give up far too soon before actually reaching real understanding.

The way you are describing it is as if you had said "military service isn't a kind of indentured servitude". Is that what you meant to say with that first comment? What I jumped on you and have been arguing about is your first comment "Indentured servitude isn't a kind of slavery". 

I didn't change my mind.  I stand by my original and subsequent statements.  I'm just not going to enter new arguments into the conversation or add statements that provoke a continuation in debate.

Okay, Kris, I am going to have to make some retractions. I admit with your last substantial post, I was unable to see what you were getting at and not feeling all that motivated to read what you were saying.

However after getting some feedback from you, I read through it and realized what you were trying to say.

That makes me need to acknowledge the errors I have made. I need to retract the claim that you didn't read the conversation. It is clear to me now that you did read the conversation and were following along. I have had too many conversations where people just didn't read what was written and jumped in on a point and didn't understand its context and am pretty much ready for it to happen in most conversations these days. Perhaps I need to grow a bit more faith in humanity again.

I also see what you are saying about equating indentured servitude with military service and need to admit error and retract the argument that they are unquestionably the same thing. I can only contend that they are similar on principle, that being the one Karen stated about having someone who to controls one's every waking and sleeping moment where anything that is commanded that is legal must be obeyed.

So anyway I apologize for lashing out and expressing unnecessary frustration. I hope this apology eases the legitimate frustration from this and provides some vindication for you. I have discovered through this that you are a very reasonable person, even if you are hard to understand at times, and will weigh anything you have to say with extra care from here on.

 

This is appreciated and I respect that you went and read through that longer post with an open mind.  It's of less concern that we agree on everything down to the letter, and of more concern that the arguments at play are understood.

Breakdowns in communication are rarely one-sided.  My initial post was poorly executed, I did not make good use of opportunities to bring things back on track, and I salted in terms like 'inane' that are there to make me feel good, not to facilitate dialogue.  I am not entirely unsympathetic to your frustration, and do not pretend my contributions here are beyond reproach.  So I also offer up an apology for my lack of clarity and inexpressiveness. 

Kris

Well thanks for being understanding.  I also want to invite you to offer any input you may have on the thread I recently started.

RSS

Blog Posts

Life Condensed

Posted by Cato Rigas on October 19, 2014 at 8:30pm 1 Comment

Cool Vehicle Inspection!

Posted by Ed on October 18, 2014 at 9:03am 2 Comments

Services we love!

We are in love with our Amazon

Book Store!

Gadget Nerd? Check out Giz Gad!

Advertise with ThinkAtheist.com

In need a of a professional web site? Check out the good folks at Clear Space Media

© 2014   Created by umar.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service